PDA

View Full Version : Getting school bullies in better shape...



Fazor
2008-Jan-11, 05:36 PM
...by making them walk everywhere, opposed to driving. Okay so that was just a way to tie a thread title into the thread. Anyway, I saw this (http://www.wtov9.com/news/15023853/detail.html) today, about the WVa. Gov's proposal to instate a system where non-performing students and school bullies, collectively referred to as "Troubled teens" could lose their driving privileges.

Unfortunately, the article doesn't speak to the specifics of the proposal. I foresee those against the idea of being afraid that the system could be abused, and "good kids" will lose their right to drive. I for one don't think a law should be ignored because some innocent people might get caught in it (there's people in jail for murder who never killed anyone, should we just do away with murder?). To me the more important question is "How will this system be carried out, and how much room for abuse will there be?".

I'll have to do some digging to see if I can find any more information on the proposal itself (What constitutes a "troubled teen" specifically, who has the power to revoke the license, how will kids be reported, etc.).

But I do agree with the following statement:

Manchin said for teens who bully, detention and suspension isn't enough. However, he said if they lose their rights to the roads that would make a difference, and thus the issue is worth pursuing.

tdvance
2008-Jan-11, 05:58 PM
It would work--being able to drive to school rather than ride the bus was a mark of honor in my high school in WV. Taking that away from a kid would be quite a demotion--the cool guy with the cool wheels now has to ride the bus.

torque of the town
2008-Jan-11, 06:03 PM
the cool guy with the cool wheels now has to ride the bus.


And punch the head of the small nerdy kid on the seat in front

:whistle:

Neverfly
2008-Jan-11, 06:09 PM
the cool guy with the cool wheels now has to ride the bus.


And punch the head of the small nerdy kid on the seat in front

:whistle:

Pretty much...

We need to back off- quit coddling.

No wonder kids snap and go Columbine.
Because we Don't Allow them to snap.

Back when I had a bully- I got to the point where enough was enough.
I beat him up.

I got detention from school and a 'congratulatory taken out to dinner' by my grandparents.

DyerWolf
2008-Jan-11, 06:10 PM
And punch the head of the small nerdy kid on the seat in front

Who was the ratty little runt who snitched on him out in the first place, and thus clearly deserves it:evil:

Fazor
2008-Jan-11, 06:29 PM
Pretty much...

We need to back off- quit coddling.

No wonder kids snap and go Columbine.
Because we Don't Allow them to snap.


I think you're missing the point of the proposal. It's not to necessarily keep kids from having to deal with their problems, but it's to discipline the unexplainable, to try to correct their behavior before they become life-time criminals.

In other words, it's not about protecting kids from bullies, it's about finding an effective way to punish bullies for their inappropriate behavior.

ETA: Well, that's what I hope the point of the proposal is. I haven't gotten a chance to investigate because for once I'm actually busy at work. But I think it's a great plan if you're targeting chronic troublemakers, but not if you're also punishing good kids for a single isolated incident.

soylentgreen
2008-Jan-11, 06:34 PM
I for one don't think a law should be ignored because some innocent people might get caught in it....

Until it's YOU, right? :rolleyes:

Non-passing students? That's sounds a little wide of a field. Even just the idea of lumping "bullies"(itself very vague) in the same boat as "troubled"(a vague and flexible euphemism the NSDAP itself would love!) is foolish to say the least, but for the current state of reasoning around the nation, sadly it's par for the course.

Besides, just based on some of the posts in this forum, quite a few posters could well be considered "troubled". Should we take their licenses away too?

Some 70 years ago, Victor Klemperer made some very keen observations about language and the cult of misuse it can be exploited for. Take a look someday, you might not like what you recognize.

The governor's motives may be sound, but he(like alot of people around here) has way too much faith in a process like that working efficiently, soundly and without corruption and abuse...and in Fazor's area of nonconcern, not punishing the wrong people.

You really want to do some good, start with the senior citizens and all you have to do is test them. Test 'em every year or two...no testy...no licensey! Frankly society will be alot better off with a great amount of seniors off the road than a handful of bullies.

NEOWatcher
2008-Jan-11, 06:45 PM
...In other words, it's not about protecting kids from bullies, it's about finding an effective way to punish bullies for their inappropriate behavior...
RAH, RAH. Hit'em where it makes a difference.
It used to be a detention or suspension meant some serious consequences from the parents. But; that was in some galaxy far far away or in days of yore, or whatever...

We just had a situation here.
Cleveland Teacher Attacked, Hospitalized With Serious Injuries (http://www.myfoxcleveland.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=5448562&version=18&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1)
This morning, they said they don't know if there are going to be charges. (I just hope that means they are still collecting evidence)
Somebody like that probably just things oooh excused absence, I don't need to forge an excuse.

And if you watch the video of the incident (not much to see) notice how many people are actually laughing.

NEOWatcher
2008-Jan-11, 06:52 PM
Until it's YOU, right? :rolleyes:
...
Besides, just based on some of the posts in this forum, quite a few posters could well be considered "troubled". Should we take their licenses away too?
So; I agree with your thoughts about vagueness and abuse, but that doesn't mean "drop it". That means to me, we need to do a bit more planning and better wording to make sure it fits the conditions we are trying to control.

My criteria is, how many people get away with the problem vs how many people are wrongly punished. You are always going to get both, and you always need to make some sort of balance.


You really want to do some good, start with the senior citizens and all you have to do is test them. Test 'em every year or two...no testy...no licensey! Frankly society will be alot better off with a great amount of seniors off the road than a handful of bullies.
The issue here is teens. It may be related (because of licenses) but it has no bearing on the problem or the solution.

tdvance
2008-Jan-11, 06:53 PM
"You really want to do some good, start with the senior citizens and all you have to do is test them. Test 'em every year or two...no testy...no licensey! Frankly society will be alot better off with a great amount of seniors off the road than a handful of bullies."

ah but more accidents are caused by people under 25 than by senior citizens! Getting bullies off the road would almost surely make things safer. I tend to think driving for a minor is a privilege, not a right, and have no problem with requiring passing grades and decent behavior in school as a requirement for the privilege--one purpose of school is to teach good behavior, after all, and this would only help.

Fazor
2008-Jan-11, 07:15 PM
You really want to do some good, start with the senior citizens and all you have to do is test them. Test 'em every year or two...no testy...no licensey! Frankly society will be alot better off with a great amount of seniors off the road than a handful of bullies.
Well, that's way off topic, as this proposal has little-to-nothing to do with driving ability, and is aimed at more effective punishment for minors. (That being said, I agree with you 100%)

Soylent, Keep in mind that the vagueness is coming form the article, not the proposition. We have to look at the specifics. What I meant was, just because there's a percieved chance that some straight-A never-absent kid might get labled as a bully, it doesn't mean to throw out the whole idea. We need to look at the specifics (if customers would stop making me actually earn my paycheck today, I could do that) before we say it's too vague.

edit: I initially attributed the above quote to the wrong poster. My apologies tdvance. Corrected

Gillianren
2008-Jan-11, 07:41 PM
In my high school, what we had was not so much bullies (that was an elementary school/junior high problem) but gang members. I don't think most of them could afford cars. We rode city buses, too; high school students didn't get school buses but city bus passes. And that meant the Los Angeles city transit. I could go practically anywhere I wanted to for free because of how far my house was from my school. Though I did still bum rides when I could, but that wasn't often, because I lived so far away from most of my classmates.

soylentgreen
2008-Jan-11, 07:55 PM
My criteria is, how many people get away with the problem vs how many people are wrongly punished. You are always going to get both, and you always need to make some sort of balance.
But balance is not very likely when one starts with harsh penalties for vaguely defined tresspasses.

The issue here is teens. It may be related (because of licenses) but it has no bearing on the problem or the solution.

Well, that's way off topic, as this proposal has little-to-nothing to do with driving ability, and is aimed at more effective punishment for minors. (That being said, I agree with you 100%)
Yes. You're both correct. However I would just quickly ask, and this touches on tdvance's post as well...if you consider it a "privilige" for teens, why is it not also a "privilige" for seniors? Or anyone, for that matter? The problem to me here starts with the idea of it as a privilige for only a certain group.

I believe, and I am unanimous in this (apologies to Mrs Slocombe!), past-it senior drivers are a bigger problem in society than a perceived need for creating draconian (and easily abused)efforts to help some folks who can't put a few bullies in their place. I'm thinking there must not be alot on a West Virginia governor's plate for one to have the time for this kind of sillyness. Is there some kind of "Bully State of Emergency" in that state?

My point in mentioning the "Remove Dangerous Seniors from Our Roads" Initiative was just a two cents(didn't there used to be a 'cents' symbol on typewriters?) comment that this was people directing too much effort in (from my perspective)the wrong direction. Unless, of course, the average school in the Mountain State is suffering ala CLASS OF 1984 (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083739/).

Now as for bullies(as defined in my experiences and those of others in my circles) ...taking away(or preventing, depending on age)driving priviliges is only going to make them bitter. And bullies are already generally bitter folks. I'm afraid anyone who thinks this approach would foster some kind of contrition or rehabilitation may have watched too much HIGHWAY TO HEAVEN in their lifetime. I want to believe in the strength of such an approach, but time in public school has taught me otherwise. Unless, of course, bullies today are much more introspective than then were some time back. From my recall of high school, plenty of "bullies" rode the bus through their senior year(however many they had!). Mode of transportation was of little consequence to them, just a pool of prey. They didn't care who they were bullying-bus passengers, chaps in the parking lot or just fellow bully car-poolers. Which I guess makes them equal opportunity thugs. Plus, us underclass lambs on the bus were at least guaranteed a chance at a contact high with each passage! :cool:

That's why I feel the collateral cost of potential abuse and the punishing of folks who are clearly outside the moral crosshairs of the Governor is NOT worth the effort. It's a kneejerk solution that has too many loose ends. I think Gillian makes a good point. Resourceful bullies can work around it way too easily. I doubt the measure would do the "damage" they think it will to the bully demographic.

But as you correctly point out Fazor, this is without seeing the specifics of the measure, only the hasty summary by the media.

apology note: After 7 years of "Patriot" Acts and other vaguely defined enabling acts, I'm just a little sensitive to overreaching measures. Especially ones that sinisterly twist language.

Fazor
2008-Jan-11, 07:55 PM
Gillian brings up a good point, in that using license revokation as punishment would not be equally effective in all areas.

I live in the 'burbs(ish) and around here, most kids over 16 have their license/have cars (or at least access to their parent's cars). One of the hurdles might be the fact that not everyone has a license. If license revokation is the main deterent for juvinile delinquance, then how can you equally apply deterence to a demographic where some have a license and some don't?

I still like the idea...although more community-service style punishments might be even better. They can be equally upheld regardless of licnese status, they are euqually-or-more-embarassing to teens (depending on the imposed service), and can actually benefit the community.

Neverfly
2008-Jan-11, 08:07 PM
It's all just so pretty...
Like Star Trek.


Haven't you folks dealt with enough HB's and CT'ists enough by now to know that some skulls are so thick that only a good pounding gets through them.http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/23.gif

Fazor
2008-Jan-11, 08:12 PM
So perhapse we should expand the judical power of gavel-usage?

Neverfly
2008-Jan-11, 08:19 PM
So perhaps we should expand the judicial power of gavel-usage?

If the judge hands the victim of bullying the gavel and says, "Go to it, son" I'm all for it.

NEOWatcher
2008-Jan-11, 08:37 PM
But balance is not very likely when one starts with harsh penalties for vaguely defined tresspasses.
Exactly my point. And I have said it before, it's hard to define acceptable behavior through drawing lines, because we've seen the effects of zero tolerance.

But; I think our discussions keep confusing penalty for conviction. No matter what the punishment is, we still need some way of making the determination of guilt. This punishment is not until that guilt has been determined, so it is no longer a question of punishing the innocent. It is now just a question of harshness and effectiveness.


...if you consider it a "privilige" for teens, why is it not also a "privilige" for seniors? Or anyone, for that matter?
It is. There are other indirect ways of losing licenses. Here in Ohio, licenses can be revoked for gas theft and for child support issues.


Now as for bullies(as defined in my experiences and those of others in my circles) ...taking away(or preventing, depending on age)driving priviliges is only going to make them bitter.
Yes; Gillianren sparked a good conversation and I would like to add to that theme:
How many of these bullies are so far past some point that since they already have been driving, they would continue whether they had a license or not.

In the end, (rhetorically) what would be a good way to punush a minor without tossing them in jail?

Noclevername
2008-Jan-11, 08:42 PM
Instead of putting the bullies on an overcrowded Generel Population bus, where they can just make more trouble, have a special bus set aside for them; preferably a short one, grey*, with "TROUBLED TEENS" painted across the sides in large letters...



*EDIT: Better yet, pastel pink. :D

Neverfly
2008-Jan-11, 08:47 PM
Instead of putting the bullies on an overcrowded Generel Population bus, where they can just make more trouble, have a special bus set aside for them; preferably a short one, grey*, with "TROUBLED TEENS" painted across the sides in large letters...



*EDIT: Better yet, pastel pink. :D

<chuckle>
Effective:p

But also yet more tax-payer money.

When did parents stop raising kids and everyone else suddenly become responsible?

Get after the parents if they are being lazy slobs. Stop doing their job for them.

They can punish at school for what happens at school.
Other than that, they need to butt out.

Fazor
2008-Jan-11, 08:49 PM
In the end, (rhetorically) what would be a good way to punush a minor without tossing them in jail?
That is the exact question which the WVa issue is attempting to address, and I applaud the Governer for it. Though through just this short conversation already some issues have been pointed out that allow me to get a better feel for how this particular approach may or may not be effective (that's why I wanted to start the thread in the first place).

And you're correct NEO; simply revoking a license doesn't mean the kid will quit driving. But it does mean if they get caught driving without a license, they will get themselves in big-boy type trouble, which will A) cost them a lot of money in fees, and B) subject their driving privleges to suspension well past the 18 year age limit set by most traffic offenses by minors.

soylentgreen
2008-Jan-11, 08:58 PM
Instead of putting the bullies on an overcrowded Generel Population bus, where they can just make more trouble, have a special bus set aside for them; preferably a short one, grey*, with "TROUBLED TEENS" painted across the sides in large letters...

<chuckle>
Effective:p
But also yet more tax-payer money.


Well...they could use the already active little yellow ones. Nothing would punish the ego quite like stepping from a "tart cart" in front of your peers.

I truly apologize if that term offends anyone, but this is Jersey.


And you're correct NEO; simply revoking a license doesn't mean the kid will quit driving. But it does mean if they get caught driving without a license, they will get themselves in big-boy type trouble, which will A) cost them a lot of money in fees, and B) subject their driving privleges to suspension well past the 18 year age limit set by most traffic offenses by minors.

I don't know if that would work either. I imagine some would be beyond the worry of those long-term consequences, they are, after all, not to worried about immediate consequences of their actions to begin with. They more likely might just fall into a form of recidivism. Or as they say in Arizona....Ripeet O-Fen-duuurrrrr!

Neverfly
2008-Jan-11, 09:03 PM
Another thing comes to mind.

These days, the drivers license seems to be the tasty treat of the punishers.
They want to suspend or revoke drivers licenses for offenses that have nothing to do with your driving.

For many people (Self included! ) that license is essential. I don't want to be constantly sweating losing it for fifteen dumb mistakes I might make that have nothing to do with driving.
Admittedly, I'm not a high school bully.

But think about it. Once you start down a path- it isn't always easy to stop- much less back up:neutral:

Especially if you are convinced that you are right.

I think the "abuse of the law" factor will also be way too high in this. Ordinary kids will get punished more.

Fazor
2008-Jan-11, 09:12 PM
I think the "abuse of the law" factor will also be way too high in this. Ordinary kids will get punished more. A possibility, but you can't say it's a certanty.

And what kinda things are you doing that you're worried about losing your license? Wait, don't answer. :)

'Round here, there's really just a handfull of non-traffic related license-revoking offenses. Two Neo mentioned (Non-support and gas theft) and possesion of marijuana. All are very known to be illegal...so it's not like you could really unintentionally be guilty.

I would imagine that in order for a "bully" to lose their license, they would have to have that handed to them by a judge (juvie or traffic? juvie's probably more suited). Typically, you have to do something pretty bad before you find yourself in juvie court.

Now if they're proposing that a teacher or school official could issue license suspensions, I would think that is way out of line.

Noclevername
2008-Jan-11, 09:14 PM
They can punish at school for what happens at school.
Other than that, they need to butt out.

Er, yeah, that's what the entire thread is about. Bullying at school. Did anyone here suggest putting kids on busses for bullying at home??

Neverfly
2008-Jan-11, 09:17 PM
Er, yeah, that's what the entire thread is about. Bullying at school.Yet they are trying to punish well outside the school grounds.



Did anyone here suggest putting kids on busses for bullying at home??
Trust me. They will most definitely try...

Neverfly
2008-Jan-11, 09:20 PM
I think the "abuse of the law" factor will also be way too high in this. Ordinary kids will get punished more. A possibility, but you can't say it's a certanty.

And what kinda things are you doing that you're worried about losing your license? Wait, don't answer. :)

'Round here, there's really just a handfull of non-traffic related license-revoking offenses. Two Neo mentioned (Non-support and gas theft) and possesion of marijuana. All are very known to be illegal...so it's not like you could really unintentionally be guilty.

Well, I'm not guilty of any of those...

But around here they can pull your license for more than that. Not paying a "Inspection sticker out" ticket will get your license suspended now.

What I said was that that seems to be the sweet spot they are aiming for these days. If the lawmakers keep aiming for it, we will all start getting nervous even if we are not yet nervous.


I would imagine that in order for a "bully" to lose their license, they would have to have that handed to them by a judge (juvie or traffic? juvie's probably more suited). Typically, you have to do something pretty bad before you find yourself in juvie court.
True, and good counterpoint.


Now if they're proposing that a teacher or school official could issue license suspensions, I would think that is way out of line.
Definitely.

Fazor
2008-Jan-11, 09:28 PM
But around here they can pull your license for more than that. Not paying a "Inspection sticker out" ticket will get your license suspended now. Keep in mind that there's a big difference between license revokation and license suspension. There's numerous insurance and title/registration related offenses that can get your license suspended here in Ohio. But you typically get your license reinstated immediately upon paying a fee. It's still meant to be a deterent to get people to pay their registration ect. on time, but it's more of an expensive ticket than anything else.

Noclevername
2008-Jan-11, 09:52 PM
Yet they are trying to punish well outside the school grounds. They are trying to punish effectively. If a crime is comitted, location of the punishment is irrelevant. Certainly the kids who got tormented don't get to put aside their bruises and fear when they leave school grounds.



Trust me. They will most definitely try...

And as long as you can predict the future, what's the next winning Powerball number? :rolleyes:

The Supreme Canuck
2008-Jan-11, 10:00 PM
I'm still a fan of forcing community service on bullies. Humiliating and public community service, if at all possible. Make them pick up trash wearing a shirt that says "Delinquent Teen" on it.

Neverfly
2008-Jan-11, 10:36 PM
They are trying to punish effectively. If a crime is comitted, location of the punishment is irrelevant. Certainly the kids who got tormented don't get to put aside their bruises and fear when they leave school grounds.


Punish effectively?

The main problem with the law interfering in peoples lives is that they continue to just be victims.

And the "law" isn't smart enough to know what it's doing.

Is this just going to be another of the "Bully" threads?

You are assuming quite a lot yourself here.

And as long as you can predict the future, what's the next winning Powerball number? :rolleyes:

Whatever... I'm not even going to grace this...

Larry Jacks
2008-Jan-11, 10:38 PM
I think the "abuse of the law" factor will also be way too high in this. Ordinary kids will get punished more.

Actually, this is a legitimate concern in today's school climate where a kid who defends himself from attack is considered just as guilty as the people attacking him.

Noclevername
2008-Jan-11, 11:11 PM
The main problem with the law interfering in peoples lives is that they continue to just be victims.

So it's every kid for himself? Nice. Yeah, this is another one of those irreconcilable differences of view. I think the law should exist to protect those who can't protect themselves, like kids, and you think whatever it is you think. So I guess no further discussion is possible.

Neverfly
2008-Jan-11, 11:17 PM
So it's every kid for himself? Nice. Yeah, this is another one of those irreconcilable differences of view. I think the law should exist to protect those who can't protect themselves, like kids,

"can't protect themselves" ?

Say's who?

Maybe they should be taught how.


and you think whatever it is you think..

{Line Removed at Moderator Request}

ETA: Let me clarify this reality for you.

Plenty of kids out there are perfectly capable of defending themselves. You act like ALL these kids that ever got picked on in school or tormented victims. Not true. Some are, most aren't.

Most 'victims' of bullying do not end up with life long trauma or mental health concerns. They get over it.

Part of growing up is learning the skills necessary to make it in a tough world.

Childhood fighting and learning to deal with issues is a normal part of social development. Interfering inhibits this development.


Originally Posted by Lazy Boy:
Sometimes you have to suffer a little bit in your youth to motivate yourself to succeed in later life.
Do you think if Bill Gates [Was Popular] in high school, do you think there'd be a Microsoft?
Of course not.
You got to spend a long time in your own locker with your underwear shoved up your [Butt Crack] before you start to think,
"You'll see. I'm going to take of the world of computers! I'll show them."

Neverfly
2008-Jan-11, 11:42 PM
Out of respect for a Moderator that politely asked me to remove a line from my last post- I complied.

But NoCleverName, You no longer need to worry about "whatever it is that I think" .

This will be Neverfly's Last and final Post on BAUT.

It's been fun at times and annoying at others.

But it's definitely time for me to go.

Tinaa
2008-Jan-11, 11:53 PM
All right. Apparently bully threads are too hot for BAUT. Either y'all chill or I'll lock the thread. Remember the most important rule: Be nice!

Noclevername
2008-Jan-12, 12:22 AM
I know Neverfly said he's leaving again, but I still feel the need to correct some of these misstatements and misassumptions.


Not true. Some are, most aren't.

Most 'victims' of bullying do not end up with life long trauma or mental health concerns. They get over it.
Can this assumption be backed up by fact? Unreported trauma does not mean no trauma.


Part of growing up is learning the skills necessary to make it in a tough world.

Childhood fighting and learning to deal with issues is a normal part of social development.
I totally agree. It's the definition of what is necessary to that development that is in question.


Interfering inhibits this development.
Again, what constitutes "interfering" with "normal" development? Undefined.

Whirlpool
2008-Jan-12, 12:54 AM
I know Neverfly said he's leaving again, but I still feel the need to correct some of these misstatements and misassumptions..

What does that mean? You both are Irreconcilable when it comes to topics like these.



Can this assumption be backed up by fact? Unreported trauma does not mean no trauma.

What fact do u want to know ? Is it not possible? That there are kids who can get over the trauma ? Every human being has experiences , traumatic and not , but those a part of why we survives this world. Although , others don't recuperate over traumatic /tragic experiences BUT, it is Possible.

Dawnofday
2008-Jan-12, 09:35 AM
Every child at one time or another faces a difficult situation, and sorry to say every child probably will come in contact with a bully. Apparently, I encountered my first when I was four. Every day I would come home crying to my father about one boy who always picked on me. Well, I guess my dad kinda had Neverfly's approach. One afternoon my dad kept bugging me to punch him in the nose. I refused with tears and said no. Well, when I did hit my dad in the nose he told me he asked me to do it repeatedly. (Despite the tears in his eyes at the time) He said the next time that boy bothered me that I needed to do that to him.
Well, the next day the same boy was at it again. Instead of using my fist I picked up a stick and hit him in the nose. That day my father recieved a phone call from has dad. Needless to say I never had a problem with him again.
The only time I ever struck someone that I remember was defending my brother. Honestly, I think it is very harsh to lump kids that don't have the greatest G.P.A.'s in with Bullies. There are good kids out there that don't make good grades, and it is hard for them to do so. Not every one has the same academic level. The government has to much control as it is.
I'm sorry to see Neverfly leave because he shared a differing opinion and I can say I agree with a lot of what he had to say. You know what they say......opinions are like armpits, everyone has two.

Halcyon Dayz
2008-Jan-12, 01:01 PM
Isn't highschool a bit late in life to start modifying that kind of socially undesirable behaviour?

tdvance
2008-Jan-12, 06:26 PM
I know for a fact there are plenty of kids who can't protect themselves. "stop hitting yourself!" I say, "Stop hitting yourself!" yet he keeps hitting himself... :)

Bogie
2008-Jan-13, 03:02 PM
Neverfly was one of my friends in the strange way you can make friends at BAUT.

Flyback Neverfly.

danscope
2008-Jan-14, 04:03 AM
Driving is an important privilige which requires good judgment, a disciplined persona and a comensurate grounding in good manners and sensibility.
Those who continually exhibit a scorn for these qualifications remove themselves as candidates for such privilige, and it is just that proper society
protect the roads from such villainy. An idea whose time has come. To support such laws is to generate the respect for the privilige and understand the laws
we live by.
And as such, it should be against the law to own and harbor a motor vehicle
and purchase same without a valid driver's license. And it should be a federal law
against trying to obtain a drivers license in any other state if your license has been suspended or revoked in any state, untill that state has decided to
re-examin the person in question. Many lives would be saved and much trouble would be avoided with this as a national policy. This will work,

Things are going to change. They have to.
No deserving person is inconvenienced. Those who don't belong on our roads will not risk the terrible costs for violation.

torque of the town
2008-Jan-14, 12:42 PM
Flyback Neverfly.



DITTO.

Nicholas_Bostaph
2008-Jan-14, 05:21 PM
Plenty of kids out there are perfectly capable of defending themselves. You act like ALL these kids that ever got picked on in school or tormented victims. Not true. Some are, most aren't.
For anyone who still wishes to discuss, I would like to ask in response to this: for what purpose? Why teach them to physically defend themselves. Many kids are perfectly 'capable' of hunting and foraging for their own food, but it's an unnecessary skill in an enlightened society because it is no longer as efficient as other methodologies. Hunting or foraging can be an interesting and engaging hobby for some, but there's not reason for it to be mandatory for all society. It's not a matter of what a person can do, but what they should have to do.

I'm relatively minimalist when it comes to government, but one of the primary responsibilities of a government is maintaining a police force to protect citizens' rights. If my neighbor walks over when I'm shoveling the snow from my driveway, punches me in the nose, and takes my shovel to do his own driveway, I see no reason why I should be expected to walk over and beat him up. Besides the fact that this will escalate and waste many hours that could be used productively (and such escalation can lead to injury or death), my rights have been infringed and only an impartial third party, with more power than either of us, can apply justice fairly and retain order. Otherwise it becomes 'might makes right'.

Just because the perpetrator and victim are younger than my neighbor and myself does not mean that physical assault, stalking, or other crimes should be treated any differently. These issues should be resolved quickly and rationally without undue emotion and anger. The bully needs to be forced to take personal responsibility, and the victim should not be required to oversee the punishment and rehabilitation. Again, to do so would be inefficient. I'd personally like to see a system aimed more toward rehabilitation, like required psychologist appointments in addition to a punishment, but even something like the OP is preferable to an 'ignore the crime' approach.

Larry Jacks
2008-Jan-14, 08:23 PM
In a perfect world, there would be no need for self-defense. In a perfect world, there would be so little crime that it wouldn't be something any reasonable person would need to consider. Unfortunately, we live in a far from perfect world.

Police rarely stop a crime before the fact or in commission. They come by afterwards, take a report, and file it. Once in a while, they'll actually act on it. If you expect the police to protect you, you're likely in for a rude awakening.

Self-defense is a fundamental human right. You can go for years or even your entire life without ever having to exercise that right but denying an individual the right to self defense is turning over the world to criminals.

Nicholas_Bostaph
2008-Jan-14, 08:43 PM
I don't completely disagree Larry, but while immediate action while being attacked by an unknown may be a useful skill, I think it's far removed from bullying. It's the difference between armed robbery and harrassment. In the latter you know the responsible party and can take legal action against them.

As for police coverage not being neccessary for that, I think that's a seperate topic altogether.

Dawnofday
2008-Jan-15, 07:59 AM
I totally agree Neverfly......Never say Never and consider coming back. AS I was reading over the last posts I will say that Nicholas Bostaph as you see that we are living in an enlightened society (that I might add is falling short and destructing rapidly.....also a different subject for a different time) I do agree that if there is a nonviolent way to deal with a bully that approach is best. Usually, there is a psychological reason that a person acts the way that they do. And yes, people do need to take responsibility for there actions. I'm a firm believer in that. But we do not live in a perfect world...In a perfect world there would be no crime, no murder, no hate, no reason to beat you up and take your shovel. What would you do if an adult came after one of your children in front of you? How civilized and rational would you be? When I was a kid a neighbor chased a friend and I and swatted us with a rake. Well, my dad saw that. It was a common occurance where I lived for waterfights to happen on hot days. That day I was a brat, but an adult retaliated to being violent with a rake because I guess he thought he was sugar and he would melt!:silenced: My father came over to talk to him and told him if he felt the need to be aggressive to pick on someone his own size.
He didn't like that and tried to hit my father with a rake. My dad is 6'2 and this guy looked like papa smurf compared to him. Well, my father didn't have time to call the proper authorities and he didn't get hit with the rake. My father grabbed the rake and pushed the fella back into his son's pool, and got just a tad bit wet:lol: There are some times that you have to stand up for yourself. If you don't then you will get hurt and so will others if no one stands up to a person. When someone is throwing a punch at you do you sit and try to have an intellectual conversation with the person and try to figure out why they want to rearrange your face? Sometimes the only message someone like understands is a little pain themselves. There was a 13 year old boy who kept continually harrassing my son (who is 8). I told my son not to fight back, tell a teacher let someone know what's going on. Well, one day my daughter saw this kid hit my son and without a second thought she punched him in the nose. The kid stood there in shock. He hasn't bothered my son since and he is extra nice to him when my daughter is around. I didn't scold her, but I told her next time go to a teacher immediately. Sometimes what we would like to do in a perfect world and what we have to do in the world in which we live to survive is the difference between fantasy and reality.

Maksutov
2008-Jan-15, 09:21 AM
When I read the title of this thread, I got the impression it had to do with school bullies not being physically fit (perhaps per a government study), and what was needed to be done to get them back to where they could beat up other kids without putting undue stress on their neglected cardiovascular systems.

The next thought was, what's next?, an affirmative action program for out-of-shape bullies? Based on the premise that, just as every party needs a pooper, every playground needs a bully?

:doh:

Whirlpool
2008-Jan-15, 09:46 AM
Very well said Dawnoftheday.
We are survivors of this planet.

Just like to common quote said: "If the going gets tough, the tough gets tougher" :lol:

Bullies are a part of the odds in life that we deal with every single day , whether it's at school or at work.

Getting them in better shape , is Dealing with them Head On.
Not letting yourself to be a victim.

So if in case with kids , as I've said in the previous Bully thread , Parents should teach their kids to stand up and fight back and gain self - confidence.

Neverfly's been talking about it before in the other Bully Thread.

Neverfly, even if you said this is your final post, just like Bogie and the others , PLS COME BACK.

Neverfly
2008-Jan-15, 09:59 AM
Don't you folks have anything better to do than to pick on me?http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/45.gif

The Backroad Astronomer
2008-Jan-15, 10:26 AM
Don't you folks have anything better to do than to pick on me?http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/45.gif
Nah.

I kind of had the opposite experience. In grade eight because of bullying, a second cousin who spent two years bugging me about my weight, and a very rude joke about what my grandfather and grandmother were the night she died I decided to start walking home after school. I did this again in the fall and springs during grades ten to the end of twelve. In grade eight it was about 4 km and then was 5 to 6 km. In grade twelve I had some encouragement as there was car load of girls who would yell "hi" as they drove by, ok never lost any weight but it felt better then being bothered all the way home.

Columbine was the result of a bunch of kids who were bullied and decided to respond to all the bullyhing over the years.

torque of the town
2008-Jan-15, 10:59 AM
Don't you folks have anything better to do than to pick on me?http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/45.gif


Trying to hide behind a new avatar will not save you!



we will still get you after school:D

Whirlpool
2008-Jan-15, 11:07 AM
Trying to hide behind a new avatar will not save you!



we will still get you after school:D


I agree.

That New Avatar is .....interesting ... hmm :think:

HenrikOlsen
2008-Jan-16, 11:12 AM
Most 'victims' of bullying do not end up with life long trauma or mental health concerns. They get over it.
Stopping bullies is something you do for the rest, those that don't get over it.
Those you seem willing to forget because you're not one of them.

HenrikOlsen
2008-Jan-16, 06:36 PM
I would like to apologize to Neverfly for the way I managed to make my comment sound like he don't care about the real victims.

On the other hand all the anecdotes about how people got a bully to stop bullying by hitting back neglects to mentioned that this doesn't stop the bully, it only makes him switch to the next victim.

It requires real action by an authority figure to really stop the bullying, and to be honest, I have to agree with several other posters that revoking a driving license is not something I'd expect to show serious results.

Enforced psychiatric counseling might though.